September 11th And The Bush Administration: Compelling Evidence for Complicity Part 1
informationclearinghouse.info
Walter E. Davis, PhD
08/31/03: (Information Clearing House)
Introduction
Clearly, one of the most critical questions of the twenty-first century concerns why the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001 were not prevented. As I outline below, there are numerous aspects regarding the official
stories about September 11th which do not fit with known facts, which contradict each other, which defy common
sense, and which indicate a pattern of misinformation and coverup. The reports coming out of Washington do very
little to alleviate these concerns.
For example, the Congressional report released on July 25, 2003 by a joint panel of House and Senate intelligence
committees concluded that 9/11 resulted in C.I.A. and F.B.I. "lapses." While incompetence is frightening enough
given a $40 billion budget, it is simply not consistent with known facts. It is consistent with the reports from other
government scandals such has the Iran Contra Affair which produced damage control and cover up but not
answers to the more probing questions. But perhaps a comparison to Watergate is more apropos since we now
have twenty-eight pages of this report, which the Bush Administration refuses to release. The report from the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is believable unless you are seriously interested in the truth.
Under more careful scientific scrutiny, it does not answer some very important questions.
Newspapers across the country call for an investigation into Bush’s lies about the reasons for war on Iraq. Many
people may accept the fact of Bush’s false pretext for a war on Arab people in a distant place, especially after the
fact. However, few people will be as accepting if it is shown that this Administration was complicit in acts of
atrocities against its own people.
The magnitude of the crisis is readily apparent by noting that 9/11 serves as a pretext for a never-ending war
against the world, including preemptive strikes against defenseless, but resource rich countries. It also serves as a
pretext for draconian measures of repression at home, including the cabinet level Department of Homeland
Security and Patriot Act I, and its sequel. September 11th has become the cause for numerous other acts from
massive increases in military spending and to a Fast Track Trade Agreement for the President.
To date, investigations stop far too short, the public is left in the dark on too many questions easily answered, and
no one in the Bush Administration has been held accountable for any actions surrounding the attacks of September
11, 2001. The National Commission on Terrorists Attacks Upon the United States, which was formed at the
insistence of the family of some of the victims, is continuing to hold hearings and a final report is expected by May,
2004. It remains to be seen if, after a two-year lapse, they can come closer to the truth about September 11th. I
believe that this would only happen if public pressure were brought to bear and accountability demanded from the
Bush Administration. Accountability for any atrocity should attract the attention of serious investigative reporters,
media critics and even news commentators. That is their chosen responsibility. Who is to raise the question of why
journalists and others in the mass media are failing the people of the U.S. and the world?
In this article, I outline twenty-two items of evidence and questions, each one sufficient reason to demand an
investigation into why September 11th was not prevented. Together, these items suggest that the most plausible
explanation of events is that the Bush Administration was complicit in the terrorist attacks. This should be a
national and international scandal. What is being discovered will shock many people, which is one of the reasons
for deliberate corporate media coverup. But a significant number of people within the U.S. see (or will see) the
consistencies in the events surrounding 9/11 as described below, and what they know about U.S. foreign policy.
Nevertheless, the degree to which this Administration is pursuing a course of world domination at any cost is
unprecedented. One of the best ways of putting a halt to this destructive course is to expose the Bush
Administration and insist on their accountability to the American people. Thus, the intent of this article is to help fill
the void in the media on the issue of the Bush Administration’s complicity in 9/11.
Here is the official story: On the morning of September 11, 2001 four Boeing passenger jets were hijacked within
an hour by nineteen Arab terrorists armed with boxcutters. Pilots among these terrorists took control of the
commercial planes and changed course toward targets in New York City and Washington D.C. Two of the planes
were deliberately crashed into the Twin Towers, causing fires within the towers, which melted the steel support
structures, thereby causing the buildings to collapse completely. A third plane was deliberately crashed into the
Pentagon. Passengers on the fourth plane overpowered the hijackers and caused the plane to crash in
Pennsylvania. This was an attack on America planned and directed by Osama bin Laden as the leader of
Al-Qaeda, a previously obscure anti-U.S. international terrorist organization composed mainly of Arabs. This
story cries out for further explanations, but nothing official is forthcoming. People are simply expected to believe
the official version without question.
Evidence of Complicity by the Bush Administration in 9/11 Terrorist Attacks
The following twenty-two separate and related points, citing evidence requiring further investigation, and include
questions that demand answers, were formulated on the basis of the information from the several sources cited at
the end, which should be consulted for verification and documentation. These sources contain extensive detailed
information and analysis beyond what is provided in this summary. I hope that this information will incite public
outrage leading to full accountability.
1) The entire United States intelligence community knew of the 9/11 attacks before hand, including the
fact that commercial jets were to be used as bombs; they also knew the approximate dates and possible
targets but were called off their investigations. Western intelligence had been aware of plans for such terrorist
attacks on U.S. soil as early as 1995. The plan was known as "Project Bojinka." It was known to both the CIA
and FBI and was described in court documents in the trial in New York of Ramzi Yousef and Abdul Murad for
their participation in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center (WTC).
Seven to eight weeks prior to September 11th, all internal U.S. security agencies were warned of the impending
Al-Qaeda attacks. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was warned of the attack but did nothing to beef
up security. At least two weeks prior to September 11th the FBI agents again confirmed that an attack on lower
Manhattan was imminent. However, the FBI agents were commanded to cut short their investigations into the
attacks and those involved. Agents were threatened with prosecution under the National Security Act if they
publicized information pertaining to their investigations. Some field agents predicted, almost precisely, what
happened on September 11th.
As early as 1997, Russia, France, Israel, the Philippines and Egypt all warned the U.S. of the possibility of the
attack. Warning also came from came from several others sources as well. Recently (May 25, 2002), CBS
revealed that President Bush had been warned in an intelligence briefing on August 6, 2001that bin Laden might be
planning to hijack commercial planes for a domestic attack in the U.S.
2) There is incontrovertible evidence that the US Air Force all across the country was comprehensively
"stood down" on the morning of September 11th. Routine security measures, normally in place, which
may well have been able to prevent the attacks, or reduce their impact, were suspended for one hour
while the attacks were in progress, and re-instated once they were over. Sequence of events:
8:46 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 from Boston smashed into the north tower of the WTC. The tower
collapses at 10:28 a.m.
9:03 a.m.: United Airlines Flight 175 from Boston smashed into the south tower. It completely collapses at
9:59am.
9:38 a.m.: AA Flight 77 from Dulles hits the Pentagon.
10:10 a.m.: United Flight 93 from Newark crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
Andrews Air Force Base is a huge military installation about 10 miles from the Pentagon. On September 11th
there were two entire squadrons of combat-ready fighter jets at Andrews. They failed to do their job of protecting
the skies over Washington D.C. Despite over one hour’s advance warning of a terrorist attack in progress, not a
single Andrews fighter tried to protect the city. The FAA, NORAD and the military have cooperative procedures
enabling fighter jets to automatically intercept commercial aircraft under emergency conditions. They do not need
instructions from the White House to carry out these procedures, yet they were not followed.
American Airline Flight 11 departed from Boston Logan Airport at 7:45 a.m. Between 8:13 and 8:20 a.m. Flight
11 became unresponsive to ground control and radar indicated that the plane had deviated from its assigned path
of flight. Two Flight 11 airline attendants had separately called American Airlines reporting a hijacking, the
presence of weapons, and the infliction of injuries on passengers and crew. At this point an emergency was
undeniably clear. Yet, according to NORAD's official timeline, NORAD was not contacted until 20 minutes later
at 8:40 a.m. Tragically the fighter jets were not deployed until 8:52 a.m., a full 32 minutes after the loss of contact
with Flight 11.
Flights 175, 77 and 93 all had this same pattern of delays in notification and delays in scrambling fighter jets.
Delays that are difficult to imagine considering a plane had, by this time, already hit the WTC. The plane striking
the pentagon is particularly spectacular. After it was known that the plane had a problem, it was nevertheless able
to change course and fly towards Washington, for about 45 minutes, fly past the White House, and crash into the
Pentagon, without any attempt at interception. All the while two squadrons of fighter aircraft were stationed just 10
miles from the eventual target. Unless one is prepared to allege collusion, such a scenario is not possible by any
stretch of the imagination.
3) Neither the Joint Chief of Staff, the Secretary of Defense nor the President of the United States acted
according to well established emergency protocols. Acting Joint Chief of Staff General Richard B. Myers
stated that he saw a TV report about a plane hitting the WTC but thought it was a small plane. So he went ahead
with his meeting. By the time he came out of the meeting the Pentagon had been hit. Whose responsibility was it to
relay this emergency to the Joint Chief of Staff?
The Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was at his desk when AA77 crashed into the Pentagon. How is it
possible that the National Military Command Center, located in the Pentagon and in contact with law enforcement
and air traffic controllers from 8:46 a.m., did not communicate to the Secretary of Defense, also at the Pentagon,
about the other hijacked planes especially the one headed to Washington? After he was notified, why did he go to
the war room?
The actions of the President, while the attacks were occurring, indicate that he deliberately avoided doing anything
reasonably expected of a President wanting to protect American citizens and property. Why didn't the Secret
Service inform him of this national emergency? When is a President supposed to be notified of everything the
agencies know? Why was the President permitted by the Secret Service to remain in the Sarasota elementary
school? At 9.05, nineteen minutes after the first attack and two minutes after the second attack on the WTC,
Andrew Card, the presidential chief of staff, whispered something in President Bush’s ear. The president did not
react as if he was interested in trying to do something about the situation. He did not leave the school, convene an
emergency meeting, consult with anybody, or intervene in any way, to ensure that the Air Force completed it’s
job. He did not even mention the extraordinary events occurring in New York, but simply continued with the
reading class. His own explanations of his actions that day contradict known facts.
In the case of a national emergency, seconds of indecision could cost thousands of lives; and it's precisely for this
reason that the government has a whole network of adjuncts and
advisors to insure that these top officials are among the first to be informed, not the last. Where were these
individuals who did not properly inform the top officials?
In short, the CIA, the DCI, the State Department, the President, and key figures around him in the White House,
were ultimately responsible for doing nothing in the face of the mounting evidence of an impending threat to U.S.
national security. Incompetence is a highly improbable explanation.
4) Prior to 9/11, the US intelligence agencies should have stopped the nineteen terrorists from entering
this country for intelligence reasons, alone. Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers' visas should have been
unquestionably denied because their applications were incomplete and incorrect. Most of the 19 hijackers
were young, unmarried, and un-employed males. They were, in short, the "classic over-stay candidates". A
seasoned former Consular officer stated in the National Review magazine, "Single, idle young adults with no
specific destination in the United States rarely get visas absent compelling circumstances."
There are several cases damaging to the credibility of the official accounts of 9/11. But the U.S. response to
Mohamed Atta, the alleged lead hijacker, is most extraordinary. The FBI had been monitoring Atta’s movements
for several months in 2000. According to PBS’ Frontlines, the Immigration and Naturalization Service failed to
stop Atta from entering the U.S. three times on a tourist visa in 2001, even though officials knew the visa had
expired in 2000, and that Atta had violated its terms by taking flight lessons. Furthermore, Atta had already been
implicated in a terrorist bombing in Israel, with the information passed on to the United States before he was first
issued his tourist visa.
5) How did many of the hijackers receive clearance for training at secure U.S. military and intelligence
facilities, and for what purposes? Many of the terrorist pilots received their initial training in Venice,
Florida at one of two flight schools of highly questionable credibility and with approval of US intelligence.
Mohamed Atta had attended International Officers School at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama;
Abdulaziz Alomari had attended Aerospace Medical School at Brooks Air Force base in Texas; Saeed Alghamdi
had been to the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California. These are all names of identified hijackers, so
why has the U.S. government attempted to deny the match? As early as three days after the 9/11 attacks, FBI
Director Robert S. Mueller III claimed that these findings were new and had not been known by the FBI
previously. This claim is a lie.
Zacarias Moussaouri was arrested after his flight trainers at the Minnesota flight school, Pan Am International
Flight Academy, reported highly suspicious behavior. He was greatly unqualified; he wanted to learn to fly a 747
but wasn’t interested in takeoffs or landings; he was traveling on a French passport, said he was from France, but
could not speak French. When
contacted, the French said he was a suspected terrorist connected to Al-Qaeda. However, a special counter
terrorism panel of the FBI and CIA reviewed the case and dismissed it.
There are numerous glaring anomalies, illegalities and scandals connected with Wally Hilliard and Rudi Dekker’s
Huffman Aviation School at Venice, Florida where other hijackers trained. Dekkers had no aviation experience
and was under indictment in his native country, The Netherlands, on financial charges. He purchased his aviation
school at just about the time the terrorist pilots moved into town and began their lessons. He has yet to be
investigated even though he initially trained most of the hijackers.
Britannia Aviation was awarded a five-year contract to run a large regional maintenance facility at Lynchburg at a
time when the company virtually had no assets, employees, or corporate history and did not posses the necessary
FAA license needed to perform the maintenance. Britannia was a company with known CIA connections. It was
operating illegally out of Huffman Aviation, the flight school which trained Al-Qaeda hijackers and was given a
"green light" from the Justice Department’s Drugs Enforcement Administration, and the local Venice Police
Department was warned to "leave them alone." Why?
6) How were the hijackers able to get specifically contraband items such as box-cutters, pepper spray
and, according to one FAA executive summary, a gun on those planes? On the morning of September 11th,
when the 19 hijackers went to purchase their tickets and to receive their boarding passes, nine were singled out
and questioned through a screening process. But they passed the screening process and were allowed to continue
on with their mission.
7) At a time when the U.S. intelligence community was on alert for an imminent Al-Qaeda attack, the
Bush Administration made it easier for Saudi visitors to come to the U.S. under a program called U.S.
Visa Express, introduced four months before September 11th. Michael Springmann, former head of the Visa
Bureau at the U.S. Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia said that he was repeatedly ordered by high-level State
Departtment officials to issue visas to unqualified applicants. His complaints to higher authorities at several agencies
went unanswered. In a CBC interview, he indicated that the CIA was indeed complicit in the attacks.
8) Most of the hijackers were Saudis, as is Osama bin Laden, and the Saudi Arabian government is
known to give financial support to terrorist organizations. Why is Iraq and not Saudi Arabia a target if the
US government is concerned about terrorism? Saudi Arabia’s government cooperates with US oil and arms
industries; Iraq did not. Iraq is forced to now, of course. At least fifteen of the far-flung network of terrorist pilots
received their money from the same source. There is specific evidence that Osama bin Laden continues to receive
extensive support, not only from members of his own family, but also from members of the Saudi establishment. A
New Statesman report stated that "Bin Laden and his gang are just the tentacles; the head lies safely in Saudi
Arabia, protected by U.S. forces." The hijackers responsible for 9/11 were not illiterate, bearded fanatics from
Afghanistan. They were all educated, highly skilled, middle-class professionals. Of the 19 men involved, 13 were
citizens of Saudi Arabia.
9) Why were the FBI called off its investigation of Osama bin Laden and the Saudi Royal Family prior to
9/11? Moreover, why were the FBI Agents ordered to curtail their investigation of these attacks on
October 10, 2001? The FBI has repeatedly complained that it has been muzzled and restricted in its attempts to
investigate matters connected to Bin Laden and Al Qeada. One law enforcement official was quoted as saying,
"The investigative staff has to be made to understand that we’re not trying to solve a crime now." FBI Agents are
said to be in the process of filing a law suit agents the Agency for the right to go public.
Continues Online... |
